Sorry, I thought "E911" meant that my call would go to my LOCAL call center with name and address information, and that the BASIC 911 meant that Vonage would forward it to a contracted emergency center that has the Vonage data in their databases.

"933" tells me I have basic 911, not E911, but I don't really trust it anyway which is why I did the test.

But apparently there's a third level in there. "BASIC BASIC 911" Or I'm just confused as always.

All the more reason to TEST YOUR 911 so you know what happens, regardless of what anyone like me mistakenly calls it. (grin)

So when you call 933 it tells you be prepaired to give you number name and address. Yet when you call 911 they already have this info?

So we find out that Vonage does not update it's 933 number! This is important we shouldn't be having to test 911 from time to time.

So when you call 933 it tells you be prepaired to give you number name and address. Yet when you call 911 they already have this info?

So we find out that Vonage does not update it's 933 number! This is important we shouldn't be having to test 911 from time to time.

Now this I may write to the CEO about.

Actually, the "933" data is vague. The recording says "911 dialing is currently available for this phone. Your call will be routed to an emergency center as described in the Vonage manual., etc"

At one point it used to say "depending on your location, you may have to provide name and address". Now it says "you will have to provide your name and address". But when I tested it a month ago, I didn't.

Maybe I'd better call the SAG op center and set up another test call. Sigh.

Sounds like too many points of failure for an emergency service, to me.

And then, of course, there's the issue of users moving their adapter to a different location. I'm here in Minnesota, but could take my phone to Los Angeles. If someone happens to make a 911 call on my phone it will go to a MN center.

And then, of course, there's the issue of users moving their adapter to a different location. I'm here in Minnesota, but could take my phone to Los Angeles. If someone happens to make a 911 call on my phone it will go to a MN center.

The instructions say that if you move your adapter to another location you need to report it on line so they know to move your 911 service.

yes that huge red page you see when you sign up and fill out your 911 information for the first time, it tells you that if you move the device to another location you have to update that 911 info.

while this seems like common sense, we probably get hundreds of callsa day with scenarios like this.

Also I love it when people call up, transfer over their number to Vonage with DSL on it, then of course they lose internet service and therefore Vonage. This is the first question on the letter of authorization, yet somehow it's our fault.

phone companies used to stop a transfer and hold it up for weeks because of this, now they port it right over because they know what it's going to do to the customer (no internet and no Vonage, no POTS) and force them to come crawling back to Ma Bell.

The FCC has stated that Voip providers who use POTS *ARE* subject to that. Vonage now has to comply with that law, no matter what their opinions. They can continue stating that they are not a telephone company, but the FCC is holding them to the standard, and the standard costs money.

I don't understand how that is "hypocritical". They have regulations that they are required to follow, those regulations are part of their cost of doing business, but like every other phone company they recoup the cost of those regulations by billing them as a line item.

It's hypocritical because Vonage claims it is not a phone company when trying to avoid regulation, but acts like it is a phone company by including 'regulatory' charges on it's bill.

The 911 charges you see on a normal POTS bill are mandated by the franchise agreement the provider has with the areas it serves. This money is collected and turned over to those local entities.

Vonage does not pay those fees - at least not directly. They have successfully argued that they are -not- a telephone company, and therefore are not held to the same regulatory requirements that a POTS provider would be held to.

However, they are still sticking the charge on the bill. This isn't going to the local 911 system - at least it's not required to. It's simply extra revenue for Vonage hidden under the guise of a 'regulatory compliance charge'.

Add in the fact that the original 'Regulatory Recovery' charge of $1.50 per line was there to cover things like 911 service, and it's even more shifty.

It'd be like going to the store to buy the computer that's on sale for $399, only to find out you've got to pay $50 for an 'Advertising Recovery Fee' and $75 for a 'Warranty Recovery Fee' and $50 for a 'Employee Health Care Recovery Fee' and $25 for an 'Electricity to run our offices fee' and $10 for a 'Bonus for our Executives Fee'.

These are standard costs of doing business and should be priced into the bill. The only things that should be extra are pure taxes that the seller is only acting as an intermediary for - where they are simply collecting and passing on. If the money is just going into the company coffers, it's crap to tack it on outside the normal bill as a 'fee'.

If Vonage is worried about how they look in costs compared to their competitors, why not just say 'Unlimited for Free!' and charge $30 a month in 'recovery fees'?

I'm all for 911 and think it's great Voip companies that are acting as replacements for POTS should be required to provide it. I am also not at all opposed to paying for it. But Vonage, imo, is not being honest with their charges in this case. They are acting like it's a regulatory charge when it is not.

Care to elaborate a bit? Your response makes absolutely no sense as it stands. Are you saying that if you do move your adapter to another location Vonage fails to deliver on it's promise to move your 911? If so, please detail so we understand.

Unless you can substantiate this statement the only failure was yours for not reading the instructions.